Toyota moving to Texas

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
California ranked second in job gained last year just behind Texas.  Most of the Texas' jobs are from oil/mining while California's job gains are very broadbased. 

While Obama deserves credit for a clever bit of political jiujitsu?seeing Perry?s pro-government job creation claims and raising them $200 million?there?s one problem: the Texas jobs miracle has little or nothing to do with the policies implemented by either the state or federal governments, at least not in this country. Rather, they?re the result primarily of three things: geology, demography and geography.

First geology. You?ve heard that Texas has oil and gas. Well, thanks to the technological leaps allowing the extraction of oil and gas from shale formations, Texas has a lot more of both. From 2011-12 its Eagle Ford shale formation tripled its oil output, and oil production statewide could double by 2020.

Next, demography. Texas has benefited from that biggest of political hot potatoes, immigration. Rather than being a drag on the state?s economy, the steady influx of workers has fueled growth?according to economists [pdf] at the Dallas Federal Reserve?giving the state new, eager workers across a variety of employment areas.

Finally, Texas has benefited from geography. With its long land border with Mexico and its port access to the Gulf, Texas is a trade giant with Latin America...
Click to expand...
http://swampland.time.com/2013/05/10/obama-and-perry-and-the-texas-job-miracle/
 
morekaos said:
It is the "quality" of those SP500 jobs that are hard to replace.  Additionally the reason Chevron has moved so many jobs out is this state refuses to allow them to do what they do.  Regulatory strangle will not let an oil company function and expand here.  Look at Waste management.  They tried for ten years to get approval for a recycling facility to be built here.  Futile and expensive.  They opened the very facility in Arizona and went from white board to operation in just 2 years.  Good long term facility and good jobs....gone
Click to expand...

Really?  The "quality" of those jobs?  The ones you listed were for call centers (low wages), soup factories (also relatively low wages), and oil exploration (geograhically based). 

Schwab is going to move 1,000 jobs in the next 3 to 5 years.  Part of the reason why Schwab is doing so is because:

Bulgatz said the company also has had difficulty recruiting in the Bay Area because of the intense competition for top talent.
Click to expand...
http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_25084768/charles-schwab-move-1-000-jobs-out-san

Again...two completely different business models between California and Texas.  Texas relies on oil/energy industries and a race to the bottom to try and poach jobs away from other states.  California seeks to keep top level job with an educated and diverse workforce.  For example, California is the leader in green jobs by far because of the level of workers needed as well as California' long support for environmental protection.

Personally, I like to be in a state that is looking forward rather than staying in the past.
 
I can tell you from personal experience that the recruitment issues were very secondary. That was a ploy for lipstick on a pig pc press answers.

"Observers close to the situation blame the city?s extreme payroll tax and high cost of doing business in California as the reasons for the company?s exodus."
 
From the prospective of a up and coming CEO

Keller Rinaudo, the company's founder, spoke to us via Skype late last week to explain the decision to move from a low-tax state to a back to California.

He said he actually agreed with the criticisms that folks like Perry have made, to a point.

"It was not a short-term economic decision," he said. "California is one of the most friendly and unfriendly business environments in the world."

The company anticipates more taxes and a higher cost of living, he said.

But to achieve their goal of building the world's first affordable personal robot, they had to be on the West Coast.

"We have to find experienced roboticists, and that really only exists in a few places in the world, and California is one of them."
Click to expand...

And for tech, the Valley is still where the money is.

"I know lots of other tech companies that end up moving to the Bay Area, I think in a lot of cases though it has to do with needing investment. We're backed by a lot of really strong investors, and then finding proximity to a research center...We're building robots, not building an e-commerce store."
Click to expand...
http://www.businessinsider.com/robotics-startup-ceo-on-moving-to-california-2013-4
 
morekaos said:
I can tell you from personal experience that the recruitment issues were very secondary. That was a ploy for lipstick on a pig pc press answers.

"Observers close to the situation blame the city?s extreme payroll tax and high cost of doing business in California as the reasons for the company?s exodus."
Click to expand...

It's both.  Again, California is placing a big tax burden on companies because it can.  Texas cannot.  California have many advantages over other states.  Again, replace "California" with "United States" and you have the exact same situation.

There are jobs that simply cannot exist in California anymore due to environment regulations and high costs of living.  But environment regulation means cleaner air and beautiful environment while high cost of living is the result of high wages. 

The other interesting is that the turnaround came as the result of the Dems having a supermajority in legislature which prevented all the gridlock that Republicans were throwing up.  Gridlock is far worse than regulation or high cost of living.
 
morekaos said:
It is the "quality" of those SP500 jobs that are hard to replace.
Click to expand...
Quality is relative. Many value the job of $10/hr worker at a fast food place just as much as a CEO of an F500.
Additionally the reason Chevron has moved so many jobs out is this state refuses to allow them to do what they do.  Regulatory strangle will not let an oil company function and expand here.  Look at Waste management.  They tried for ten years to get approval for a recycling facility to be built here.
Click to expand...
I might be the only one but aren't those regulations meant to protect the land, environment and population? I'm okay with not having fuel processing and waste recycling in Cali.
They opened the very facility in Arizona and went from white board to operation in just 2 years.  Good long term facility and good jobs....gone.
Click to expand...
Smell... also gone. :)
 
Irvinecommuter said:
morekaos said:
I can tell you from personal experience that the recruitment issues were very secondary. That was a ploy for lipstick on a pig pc press answers.

"Observers close to the situation blame the city?s extreme payroll tax and high cost of doing business in California as the reasons for the company?s exodus."
Click to expand...

It's both.  Again, California is placing a big tax burden on companies because it can.  Texas cannot.  California have many advantages over other states.  Again, replace "California" with "United States" and you have the exact same situation.

There are jobs that simply cannot exist in California anymore due to environment regulations and high costs of living.  But environment regulation means cleaner air and beautiful environment while high cost of living is the result of high wages. 

The other interesting is that the turnaround came as the result of the Dems having a supermajority in legislature which prevented all the gridlock that Republicans were throwing up.  Gridlock is far worse than regulation or high cost of living.
Click to expand...

I disagree, Gridlock has been the only thing preventing the US from becoming Cali.  This state is in serious financial denial.  One side having its way is never good.  Gridlock in DC is not the system broken, it is the system functioning perfectly, checking absolute power and balancing the equation.  Why do you think the markets have moved up while DC argues with itself?  Markets love divided government, it keeps them from meddling.  CA is now free to spin itself further down the rabbit hole with no checks to cushion the landing.  The fruits of that one sided government are clear in this exact discussion.
 
Irvinecommuter said:
From the prospective of a up and coming CEO

Keller Rinaudo, the company's founder, spoke to us via Skype late last week to explain the decision to move from a low-tax state to a back to California.

He said he actually agreed with the criticisms that folks like Perry have made, to a point.

"It was not a short-term economic decision," he said. "California is one of the most friendly and unfriendly business environments in the world."

The company anticipates more taxes and a higher cost of living, he said.

But to achieve their goal of building the world's first affordable personal robot, they had to be on the West Coast.

"We have to find experienced roboticists, and that really only exists in a few places in the world, and California is one of them."
Click to expand...

And for tech, the Valley is still where the money is.

"I know lots of other tech companies that end up moving to the Bay Area, I think in a lot of cases though it has to do with needing investment. We're backed by a lot of really strong investors, and then finding proximity to a research center...We're building robots, not building an e-commerce store."
Click to expand...
http://www.businessinsider.com/robotics-startup-ceo-on-moving-to-california-2013-4
Click to expand...

And look at where that very same CEO decides to send the jobs creating his little robot....not Cali..

"Romotive now employs at least 20 people; a plant in China now manufactures the tiny robot. Rinaudo wrote that the company has signed its single largest order for 10,000 Romos."
 
morekaos said:
Irvinecommuter said:
From the prospective of a up and coming CEO

Keller Rinaudo, the company's founder, spoke to us via Skype late last week to explain the decision to move from a low-tax state to a back to California.

He said he actually agreed with the criticisms that folks like Perry have made, to a point.

"It was not a short-term economic decision," he said. "California is one of the most friendly and unfriendly business environments in the world."

The company anticipates more taxes and a higher cost of living, he said.

But to achieve their goal of building the world's first affordable personal robot, they had to be on the West Coast.

"We have to find experienced roboticists, and that really only exists in a few places in the world, and California is one of them."
Click to expand...

And for tech, the Valley is still where the money is.

"I know lots of other tech companies that end up moving to the Bay Area, I think in a lot of cases though it has to do with needing investment. We're backed by a lot of really strong investors, and then finding proximity to a research center...We're building robots, not building an e-commerce store."
Click to expand...
http://www.businessinsider.com/robotics-startup-ceo-on-moving-to-california-2013-4
Click to expand...

And look at where that very same CEO decides to send the jobs creating his little robot....not Cali..

"Romotive now employs at least 20 people; a plant in China now manufactures the tiny robot. Rinaudo wrote that the company has signed its single largest order for 10,000 Romos."
Click to expand...

Or the United States regardless of tax breaks or "lack of regulations."  California (United States) cannot prevail in a game of race to the bottom...it must innovate and pioneer new fields.  Those new fields require highly educated workforces, which California has..
 
I don't think that's true.  If you did not have all the overregulation, overbearing insurance, overburdening tax system I would wager you could get those nifty little robots manufactured in the central valley (double digit unemployment) for even less when you factor in all the transport and assembly costs.  It would never happen but I bet we could do it for just as cheap if not cheaper.
 
Doesn't all manufacturing happen in China? :)

Rotomotive is still located in San Fran where they design the robots.

Apple still has most of its design staff in Cupertino... the brains of the operations. But the products are built in China just like Rotomotive.

Seems like morekaos are cherry picking here.
 
irvinehomeowner said:
Doesn't all manufacturing happen in China? :)

Rotomotive is still located in San Fran where they design the robots.

Apple still has most of its design staff in Cupertino... the brains of the operations. But the products are built in China just like Rotomotive.

Seems like morekaos are cherry picking here.
Click to expand...

Not so, it goes to the very heart of our discussion.  Make it biz friendly and they not only will keep it here, they'll grow I here.  The current economic environment is toxic to both.  Whether it is a mature company (Apple) or a startup (Rotomotive).  Give them the choice and I guarantee they would rather have it ALL right here.  But alas,  I yearn for the sky.
 
morekaos said:
If you did not have all the overregulation, overbearing insurance, overburdening tax system I would wager you could get those nifty little robots manufactured in the central valley (double digit unemployment) for even less when you factor in all the transport and assembly costs.  It would never happen but I bet we could do it for just as cheap if not cheaper.
Click to expand...
You can't have it both ways.

If you want a democratic government where workers have rights and are protected with liability insurance, overtime wages, workers comp, there will be added cost.

You've read reports of the working conditions and wages in China (and labor farms in 3rd world countries), we would have riots in the US if that was the same here.

I've never understood this argument. It's very hard to match overseas costs due to differences in government and worker's rights. Would you rather our labor force be treated the same as abroad?
 
Where we can make it up is in efficiency, streamlined regulation (not non-existent regulation) infrastructure, wishfully a simplified tax system and arguably a stable political system.  For all the hemming and hawing we are still the second largest manufacturer on earth.  Pile on top of that a stable and reliable energy source (fracking) and we have all we need to compete.  We just lack the will to implement it as a country and a state.
 
thatOSguy said:
morekaos said:
irvinehomeowner said:
Doesn't all manufacturing happen in China? :)

Rotomotive is still located in San Fran where they design the robots.

Apple still has most of its design staff in Cupertino... the brains of the operations. But the products are built in China just like Rotomotive.

Seems like morekaos are cherry picking here.
Click to expand...

Not so, it goes to the very heart of our discussion.  Make it biz friendly and they not only will keep it here, they'll grow I here.  The current economic environment is toxic to both.  Whether it is a mature company (Apple) or a startup (Rotomotive).  Give them the choice and I guarantee they would rather have it ALL right here.  But alas,  I yearn for the sky.
Click to expand...

This had nothing to do with "business friendly." It was about consolidating operations from multiple offices/states to a low cost area (mainly salaries), with the spillover benefit of putting Toyota in a market they badly need to win in order to grow (trucks / southwest).
Click to expand...

It was not the ONLY reason but it was a significant part of it.  Of course there were strategic reasons but Business Friendly made the difference.  This is stuff they used to say about US.

"There?s a lot for any state to like in landing Toyota?s headquarters. The average salaries for the 4,000 jobs in Plano will be in the six figures, sources said, far more than manufacturing wages ? meaning that Toyota?s Texas employees will have plenty of income to spread around.

That?s not to mention the obvious prestige of landing Japan?s largest automaker and the knock-on benefits to Texas of continuing to emerge as a new geographic powerhouse as the U.S. auto industry restructures. There are existing Toyota and General Motors truck plants in the state.
So was the chance for lower corporate operating costs across the board. ?The business climate in Texas is very good overall, but particularly for large corporations,? Gigerich said. ?That?s a tremendous positive. There will be enormous savings for Toyota right off the bat.?

It also helped the case for Texas that the costs of living will be much lower for Toyota managers in North Texas than in Southern California, that they?ll be able to afford bigger houses, that they won?t have to pay state income taxes ? and that there?s a local NFL team to root for."
 
morekaos said:
"It also helped the case for Texas that the costs of living will be much lower for Toyota managers in North Texas than in Southern California, that they?ll be able to afford bigger houses, that they won?t have to pay state income taxes ? and that there?s a local NFL team to root for."
Click to expand...
But super hot weather, beaches are much farther away, property taxes are double and instead of the Lakers or Clippers, they have the Mavericks. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top